ML20027B521

Application for Amend to Licenses DPR-42 & DPR-60,correcting Typographical Errors & Clarifying Wording in Tech Specs Re Steam Generator Tube Surveillance,Steam Exclusion Sys & Auxiliary Feedwater Sys

ML20027B521
Person / Time
Site:	Prairie Island
Issue date:	09/14/1982
From:	Musolf D NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20027B517	List: ML20027B516 ML20027B521 ML20027B522
References
NUDOCS 8209210198
Download: ML20027B521 (7)

Text

.

~

9 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket No. 50-282 50-306 REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-42 & DPR-60 (License Amendment Request Dated September 14, 1982)

Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, request authorization for changes to the Technical Specifications as shown on the attachments labeled Exhibit A and Exhibit B.

Exhibit A describes the proposed changes along with reasons for the change.

Exhibit B is a set of Technical Specification pages incorporating the proposed changes.

This letter contains no restricted or other defense information.

NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY By b

u3 D M Musolf Manager of Nuclear Suppor Services On this

/

day of

[. I6a,

~

//M before me a notary public in and

/

for said County, personally' appeared D M Musolf, Manager of Nuclear Support Services, and being first duly sworn acknowledged that he is authorized to execute this document on behalf of Northern States Power Company, that he knows the contents thereof and that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, the statements made in it are true and that it is not interposed for delay.

CCb'] r^~).

%/

_ _ _/7 _Y_

BETTY J. DEAN

%f ARY MmuC M4PetsESOf A F1AMSEY COUNTY y

u, com on eip n Dec a inerJ

= =,, -

82092.lo as

-W

EXHIBIT A Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant License Amendment Request Dated September 14, 1982 Proposed Changas to the Technical Specifications Appendix A of ating Licenses DPR-42 and DPR-60 Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 and 50.90, the holders of operating licenses DPR-42 and DPR-60 hereby propose the following changes to Appendix A, Technical Specifications.

1. Specification:

Inservice Inspection Requirements - Table TS 4.2-1 PROPOSED CHANGE

a. Add magnetic particle (M.T.) as a method of examination to Table TS.4.2-1 item 1 for inspecting pump flywheels.

b. 'ipdate the notes on Table TS.4.2-1 to indicate the examinations are being performed per IWA-2220 and IWA 2230.

REASON FOR CHANGE The addition permits Prairie Island to use either magnetic particle or liquid penetrant (P.T.) methods for inspecting the pump flywheel.

The remainder of the change updates the Technical Specifications to show the examinations are being done per lWA section of ASME code.

SAFETY EVALUATION No safety evaluation is required.

M.T. is an acceptable method to use for examination of ferrous material.

2. Specification:

Steam Generator Tube Surveillance TS 4.12 2.1 Change to page TS.4.12-2 PROPOSED CHANGE l

Make the changes to Section 4.12 shown in Exhibit B, pages 4.12-2 and 4.12-2A.

REASON FOR CHANGE These changes allow the inspection to concentrate on a specific l

problem in the steam generator while meeting the C-3 criteria.

l The exceptions would be valid only if no other problems were j

identified by previous inspections, i

I SAFETY EVALUATION Plant safety is not decreased by this change because the inspection would be 100% of the specific problem area.

2.2 Change to Table TS 4.12-1 PROPOSED CHANGE Change the footnote of Table TS.4.12-1 to read:

S=3% when two steam generators are inspected during that outage.

S=6% when one steam generator is inspected during that-outage.

REASON FOR CHANGE This change is requested to minimize confusion when inter-preting the Technical Specifications.

SAFETY EVALUATIONS Safety evaluation is not required since this is not a change in the intent of the Technical Specification.

3. Specifications: Typographical Corrections to TS.3.1, TS.4.5, TS.S.6 TS.

6.1 PROPOSED CHANGE

a. Remove the redundant reference on page TS.3.1-3 as noted in Exhibit B.

Reference on page TS.3.1-3A.

b. Correct typo in TS.4.5.B.1.a by changing the word " heat" to

[

" head".

l-

c. Remove the redundant reference "(1) FSAR Section 9" which appears on page TS.5.6-2.

d. Correct Typo in TS 6.1.A.5 by changing "of Senior Reactor Operator" to "or Senior Reactor Operator".

e. Correct typo on page TS.3.1-3 in the word maximum.

REASON FOR CHANGE Correct typographical errors SAFETY EVALUATION None is required, i

~

4. Specification: TS 6.0 Administrative Controls 4.1 Update Organizational Titles

-PROPOSED CHANGE Update the NSP Corporate Organization chart Figure TS.6.1-1 as noted in Exhibit B and the titles os pages TS 6.2-1, TS 6.2-3 and TS 6.2-5.

Replace Figure TS.6.1-2 with the redrawn figure.

REASON FOR CHANGE Recent organizational changes require an update.

SAFETY EVALUATION None is required.

4.2 Updated Safety Analysis Report PROPOSED CHANGE Change the word " Final" in Final Safety Analysis Report in TS.6.2.B.4(b) to " Updated".

REASON FOR CHANGE To indicate the USAR will be used as the document for deter-mining which modifications will require Operations Committee Review. Refer to our letter dated June 18, 1982.

SAFETY EVALUATION None is required.

5. Specification:

TS.6.5.A Plant Operations PROPOSED CRANGE l

Delete the drill requirement statement from TS 6.5.A.

REASON FOR CHANGE l

i Emergency Plan Drill requirements are specifically detailed in 10 CFR 50 Appendix E and in the Facility Emergency Plans sub-mitted to the NRC for review and determination of their adequacy.

The existing requirement is inconsistent with Appendix E require-ments and is unnecessary,since current requirements are contained in the regulations.

SAFETY EVALUATION None is required.

I

, r t

I

f' l

l i

l

6. Specification: TS 6.7 Reporting Requirements 6.1 Failures or Challenges to Safety Valves PROPOSED CHANGE A requirement is added to Technical Specification to list in the annual report any safety or relief valve failure or challenges.

Refer to Exhibit B, page TS.6.7-2.

REASON FOR CRANGE To comply with the NRC request to formalize this reporting require-ment.

SAFETY EVALUATION None required since it is an administrative change in reporting requirements.

6.2. Fire Protection Reporting Requirements PROPOSED CRANGE Revised Specification 6.7.B to clarify the reporting requirements for fire protection related events.

Refer to Exhibit B, page TS.6.7-2.

REASON FOR CRANGE Fire protection system reporting requirements have been separately specified in the fire protection sections of the Technical Specifications (Sections 3.14 and 4.16).

This clarification clearly states that the established reporting pro-cedures for reportable occurrences does not apply to fire protection systems. The proposed wording is similar to wording previously approved for our Monticello plant.

SAFETY EVALUATION None required.

l

7. Specification: TS 3.3.A Engineered Safety Features PROPOSED CRANGE Clarify the wording of Specifications TS 3.3.A.1.b and TS 3.3.A.2.e.

Refer to Exhibit B, pages TS.3.3-1 and TS.3.3-2.

i i

REASON FOR CHANGE The change is needed to remove the confusion when interpreting the statements in TS 3.3.A.l.b and TS 3.3.A.2.e.

They seem to contradict each other.

SAFETY EVALUATION Since it is permissible to close an accumulator isolation valve when reactor coolant system pressure is less than 1000 psig, the other conditions related to accumlator operability should not be required until the valve is opened.

8. Specification TS 3.3.D Engineered Safety Features PROPOSED CHANGE Replace the word "that" in paragraph a,(2) on page TS.3.3-5A with "the operable diesel driven."

REASON FOR CHANGE To eliminate any confusion.

SAFETY EVALUATION This change provides clarification of an existing Technical Specit'ication requirement.

9. Specification: TS 3.4.A Steam Exclusion System PROPOSED CHANGE Add words to TS 3.4.A.3 page TS.3.4-2 as noted in Exhibit B.

REASON FOR CHANGE The proposed change would extend the general philosophy of a limited period of inoperability for one safeguards train to the steam exclusion system. This eliminates problems with disruption of ventilation and excessive damper cycling during tests.

SAFETY EVALUATION i

l Safeguards trains can be out of service when testing. The same j

philosophy is extended to the steam exclusion system. The test procedure now cycles each damper six times. One operational check of each damper per month should be adequate. The ability to maintain the operable / redundant damper open during testing or maintenance will permit cooling to be continued to that area.

l

\\

10. Specification: TS 3.4.A.2 Auxiliary Feedwater System PROPOSED CRANGE The condensate supply cross connect valves to the auxiliary feedwater system are to be controlled as noted on page TS.3.4-2 of Exhibit B.

REASON FOR CHANGE To fulfill commitments to the NRC for NUREG-0737 Items II.E.1.1 and II.E.1.2 to assure there are two level indicators monitoring the condensate storage tanks.

SAFETY EVALUATIONS By maintaining these valves open, the three condensate storage tanks are available to all auxiliary feedwater pumps. The tanks will have two redundant channels of level indication available when-the cross tie valves are open.

11. Specification:

Instrumentation System Table TS.4.1-1 Addition to Table TS.4.1-1 PROPOSED CHANGE Add to Technical Specifications the instrument operating condition limits regarding auxiliary feedwater pump suction and discharge pressure protection as noted in Table TS.4.1-1 Exhibit B.

REASON FOR CRANGE This change is needed to fulfill NSP commitments to the NRC for satisfying NUREG-0737 Item II.E.1.1 and II.E.1.2 requirements as noted in the Staff's Safety Evaluation Report.

SAFETY EVAULATIONS This instrumentation is required to protect the-auxiliary feedwater pump from damage due to loss of suction or run out.

The specified calibration schedule will insure that this instrumentation is avail-able to trip the pump to protect it from damage.

, \\

-.-~

... - - -